This symbol represents a singular being in the center of it all. That
being is
the creator, maintainer, and king of life, the universe, and everything.
This
is the ancient symbol of an idea of daunting historical and cultural
weight. This symbol represents
god, or gods, or atman, or any of dozens (at least) of
similar supreme spirits: buddha-hood, boddhisatvas, saints, demi-gods,
wise dead ancestors, or an all encompassing
feel-good spirit-of-man.

Alternative, and simpler, explanations for the events spiritual movements
are built upon exist, explanations that do not
require a supernatural interdiction. It takes a herculean imagination to
hold god as a neccessity, or to see evidence for a god's activity.
"Herculean" is here used in its figurative sense, not in its Greek
ultra-ultra-orthodox sense.

What does a superspirit do? There are many things they are
supposed to do, depending on the system being discussed: they make, sustain, and destroy worlds, they are the only
spirit that exists but seems to have a personality disorder that makes
"us", they are where spirits go once they attain self-knowledge. In other words, this writer is
confused by this concept.

Why believe in a superspirit? The problem of origins is often seen as
a place for a god to fit. This isn't a universal problem, however. Eastern
religious systems generally see the universe as eternal. But both the universe's
origins and humankind's origins are understood, at least in outline, in
natural terms. Logic or the Syllogism is sometimes
cited as a good reason, and who can argue with logic? I
am not arguing against Logic or against Syllogisms, I am merely
saying I do not assign existential import to your premises.
Pop Culture embraces the god-idea, US television
and theaters are full of shows expressing various spiritual
sentiments. Touched by an Angel, Touched by my Dead Mother (Providence),
Touched by a Newspaper (Early Edition), Touched by three sisters who are Witches (Charmed),
Touched by the FBI (X-Files), and
last on my list, Touched by Satan's Policeman (I think that's what "Spawn" was about, right?).
My mother would say, and probably yours too since mothers
are like this, "If your friends jumped off a bridge, would you?"
The correct answer is "No, Mom" (and hang your head too).
Similarly, I do not
believe the popularity of the god-idea is evidence, especially given
the counter evidence. Mystical Events are hard to debunk
without slamming a religion, I really don't want to do that. From
my little experience with such things (bloody plaster virgins)
it appears that once one is debunked, the faithful find another. Then
they hang onto that until it, too, is debunked. I'm physically in
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; there was a Medugorje-crazed
church here that had a bleeding statue, the natural reason (more exactly, tampering)
was discovered...even though people know this, there is still
a belief in this kind of "miracle".
Shroud of Turin...
same thing,
Crop-Circles...same thing,
Y2K...same thing,
Equidistant Letter Sequences...
same thing
. How many times do theists
need to be bit to understand the problem?

The Really Good News is: evidence for gods are evidence only if you
believe in gods already, but you don't have to accept the "evidence" just
because everybody else does.
Evidence for gods are not presented without a pattern, but patterns have
explanations, including randomness perceived as pattern, and
pattern as artifice.
A natural cause is not an artificer, but it leaves a pattern
perceived as an artifact.

You're not crazy if you doubt god. You're
not missing something if you aren't moved by faith promoting rumors that
others seem drawn to and you see as coincidence, wishful thinking, or the
result of stage-props.